Advanced Search Results

Span Diagnostic Vs. Assistant Controller of Patents and Design and anr ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 83; Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 8, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 25, 25(1), 25(2), 25(3), 25(4), 27, 28, 29(2), 29(3), 37, 41, 42, 47, 51, 54, 57, 59 to 63, 66, 69(3), 74, 78, 84(1) to 84(5), 85, 86, 88, 88(3), 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 96, 97, 116, 116(1), 116(2), 117, 117A, 117A(2), 117G and 158; Patents Amendment Act, 2002 - Sections 1(2), 18 and 47; Patents Amendment Act, 2005 - Sections 1(1), 1(2), 23, 60 and 61; Patents Amendment Act, 1999

Reported in : LC2009(1)22; 2008(37)PTC56(Del)

Matched in: Citation LC2009(1)22; 2008(37)PTC56(Del)

Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. Woodward Governor India P. Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 28, 29, 30 to 43D, 48, 50, 56, 143, 143(1), 143(2), 144, 145, 145(1), 145(2) and 145(3); Finance Act, 2002; Companies Act - Sections 209; Finance Act, 1967

Reported in : (2009)223CTR(SC)1; [2009]312ITR254(SC); JT2009(5)SC378; 2009(5)SCALE198; (2009)13SCC1; [2009]179TAXMAN326(SC); 2009(3)LC1519(SC); [2009] 5 SCR 738

next contended that on a proper and true interpretation of the amendment to Section 43A, introduced by Finance Act, 2002, Section 43A is clarificatory. According to the learned Counsel, the occasion for the clarificatory amendment arose in view of … as regards capital assets for scientific research [Section 35(1)(iv)] and also regarding patent rights or copyrights [Section 35A].31. As held in Arvind Mills case (supra) … the rate of exchange in respect of loans taken for revenue purposes could be allowed as deduction under Section 37(1) in the year of fluctuation in the rate of exchange or whether the same could only be allowed

M/S. Philips Electronics India Limited Vs. M/S. Asian Electronics Limi ...

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : Land Acquisition

Matched in: Judge The Honourable Smt. Justice Prabha Sridevan, Chairman &Amp; D.P.S. Parmar, Technical Member (Patents)

Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd. And Ors. Vs.monsanto Technology Llc and Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Trade (GATT), including the Trade- Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement, India, inter alia, introduced the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002, in June 25, 2002. This amendment altered the definition of “an invention” under Section 2(1)(j) to include the … protected under the PVP legislation in the same manner as non-transgenic varieties after for commercial cultivation.” their release 37. Nuziveedu submitted that a combined reading of Section 3 (j) of the Patents Act, 1970, the National Seed

Shri Chandreshwar Bhuthanath Devastan of Paroda by Its Special Attorne ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Civil

Reported in : (2003)105BOMLR915

100A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which has been amended by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002 will be prospective in operation or retrospective in operation. The aforesaid Amendment was brought into force on 1st … Clauses Act, 1897 (10 of 1897).(m) the provisions of Section 100 of the principal Act. as substituted by Section 37 of this Act, shall not, apply to or affect any appeal from an appellate decree or order which … issue which has been argued is whether any of the pending Letters Patent Appeals which have already been admitted by this Court are also covered

Novartis Ag Vs. Union of India Through the Secretary and Others

Court : Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

Subject : Intellectual Property

providing Exclusive Marketing Rights (EMR). The Indian Parliament made further amendments in the Patents Act, 1970 through the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002 (Act 38 of 2002) which came into force from 20.05.2003 along with the Patents Rules, 2003 with a … 3, R 4, R 5, R 6 and R 7, respectively) filed representations by way of oppositions under section 25(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 as amended by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as … prior art as found in a few passages therein particularly at page 37 where the Appeal Court clearly found that the District Court had erred

iridium India Telecom Ltd. Vs. Motorola Inc.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Civil Constitution

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) 1908 - Sections 2(18), 4(1), 15(1), 15A, 57, 100, 100A, 116 to 120, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129 and 148 - Order 8, Rule 1; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment) , 1976 - Sections 97 and 97(1); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1877 - Sections 16, 17, 54, 119, 160, 182 to 185, 187, 190, 191, 192, 198 to 206, 261, 409, 579, 632, 638 and 652; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1882 - Sections 638 and 652; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment)Act, 1895; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment) , 2002 - Sections 16; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1859; Central Act; Constitution of India - Article 254; High Court Original Side Rules; Punjab Court Act, 1918 - Sections 41

Reported in : AIR2005SC514; 2005(2)ALD34(SC); 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)191; 2005(2)ALT32(SC); 2005(2)AWC1872(SC); 2005(3)BomCR781; (2005)107BOMLR967; (2005)2CALLT59(SC); 2005(1)CTC304; 118(2005)D; 2005 (2) SCC 145

so interpreted as not to defeat the substantive vested rights created in favour of a litigant under the Amendment Act of 2002. Since the written statement had not been filed within the time prescribed therein, by reason of … to paragraph 36 of the Despatch, which explains the purpose of Clause 37 in the First Letters Patent. The said paragraph 36 of the Despatch … impugns the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in a Letters Patent appeal holding that the amended provision of Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 … a prayer was made that the court may exercise its powers under Section 148 of the CPC and grant further extension of 30 days beyond

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. S. Surya Prakash Reddy and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Motor Vehicles

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 2(2), 2(14), 4, 4(1), 31, 34, 35A, 91, 92, 95, 96, 100, 100A, 104, 104(1), 104(2), 104A and 141 - Order 9 - Order 16 - Order 18 - Order 21 - Order 43, Rule 1; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1877 - Sections 588; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment) Act, 2002; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1859; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1882 - Sections 588, 638 and 652; Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 140, 173 and 173(2); Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 - Sections 4A, 12(2), 19, 23, 27 and 30; Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 54; Government of India Act, 1915 - Sections 71, 72, 107 and 108; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment) Act, 1976; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment) Act, 1999; Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 39,

Reported in : I(2007)ACC361; 2006ACJ2287; 2006(4)ALD530

Constitution. After three years, Section 100A, in its present form, was inserted by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2002. The last amended Section 100A reads as under:100A. No further appeal in certain cases.-Notwithstanding anything contained in any … guided by the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1859. Similar provisions were made in the Letters Patents of the High Courts of Bombay and Madras. Clauses 15 and 44 of the Letters Patent vide which … it was revoked by another Letters Patent sent on 28-12-1865. By Clause 37 of the First Letters Patent, the Code of Civil Procedure, 1859 enacted

Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

of the 1996 Act. Relevant provisions of Section 34 (as they were prior to the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015) read as under:- 17 | Pa ge “34. Application for setting aside arbitral award. - (1) Recourse … Tribunal in virtually negating the certificate issued by the CMRS under the Delhi Metro Railway (Operation and Maintenance) Act, 2002 (hereinafter, ‘the Delhi Metro Act’) and held that the cumulative effect of the findings of the award on … SLP (C) No.8311 of 2019) JUDGMENT L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.Leave granted.1. Whether in exercise of its power under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter, ‘the 1996 Act’), the Division Bench of the Delhi High … was found to be suffering from the vices of perversity, irrationality and patent illegality. The High Court observed that in deciding the question on defects

Chemtura Corporation Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property RightsCivil

Acts : Patents Act, 1970 - Sections 3, 8, 8(1), 8(2), 11A(7), 12, 13(4), 25, 47 and 48, 48(1), 48(2), 53, 64, 64(1), 68, 69, 107 and 156; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 80 - Order 39, Rules 1, 2 and 4; Patents Rules, 2003 - Rules 12(1), 12(3), 15 and 25

Reported in : 2009(41)PTC260(Del)

above quoted application has been examined under Section 12 of the Patents Act, 1970, as amended by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002 and the first statement of objection of forwarded herewith the compliance. The documents noted in the margin are … earlier relevant Rule was Rule 13 which was to the same effect with slight changes in Form 3. 37. The Plaintiff submitted its National Phase Application for grant of patent in respect of side bearing pad assembly